Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

[Signing] Stars re-sign Ben Bishop


Recommended Posts

29 minutes ago, D-Money said:

Oleksiak + Dallas' 1st to Vegas for selecting Lehtonen. Problem solved.

Losing the third overall pick to get rid of a player with 1 year left on his contract seems like poor asset management IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Toews said:

Losing the third overall pick to get rid of a player with 1 year left on his contract seems like poor asset management IMO.

Yes, it would be ridiculous.

 

I meant to say Anaheim's 1st (from the Eaves deal). Brain-fart.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hopefully he pays off. They definitely needed a goaltender who wasn't Lehtonen or Niemi. I was kinda hoping for an exciting trade of their third pick, but I guess they'll just be boring and pick a centre anyways.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, S'all Good Man said:
Niemi's buy out is only 1.5 mil for the next 2 years Kari's is 2.6 and 1.7 mil for the next 2 years. If they did want to give us the 3OA for both these guys then by all means. make that deal Jimbo and buy out Niemi. 

 

30 minutes ago, billabong said:

Stars will buy out niemi

 

Given their internal cap, I think they'd prefer the trade route if they can over buyout (paying a guy not to play for them). We just have to give them some incentive for that 3rd OA beyond cap dumping a goalie...

 

Tanev + CBJ 2nd for 3rdOA, Lehtonen and Oleksiak.

 

Makes them a FAR better team, furthers our rebuild and gives us a vet backup for next year and a warm body on D/cushion from expansion.

 

P.S. - under $5m for Bishop is a nice deal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, J.R. said:

 

 

Given their internal cap, I think they'd prefer the trade route if they can over buyout (paying a guy not to play for them). We just have to give them some incentive for that 3rd OA beyond cap dumping a goalie...

 

Tanev + CBJ 2nd for 3rdOA, Lehtonen and Oleksiak.

 

Makes them a FAR better team, furthers our rebuild and gives us a vet backup for next year and a warm body on D/cushion from expansion.

 

P.S. - under $5m for Bishop is a nice deal.

yah i love that deal actually. Man Calgary must be seething for DAL to get him at that price, they would have paid a lot more. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, S'all Good Man said:

yah i love that deal actually. Man Calgary must be seething for DAL to get him at that price, they would have paid a lot more. 

Can't take all credit for it, TM's proposal specifically but I have been pushing a Tanev +/- to DAL for Lehtonen and their 1st for a while.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I called Bishop to Stars, but I called it at the deadline. If healthy great contract. Sounds like they wanna keep Lehtonen as well.

 

Make Niemi proposals, not Lehtonen. Niemi is the one they're moving.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, VanGnome said:

Wow. So now they REALLY need to drop one of Lehtonen or Niemi. Time for the Canucks to pounce by getting a good young prospect and the cap dump in exchange for a 3rd round pick

Nichushkin + whichever goalie they don't want for scraps? 

 

Then package Nichushkin + Tree + Loui for Ovechkin .... CUP CUP CUP! 

 

lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, captainhorvat said:

Even the pick from the eaves deal would be ridiculous, wouldnt it? Why lose a 1st round pick when dallas can just buyout the last year.. 

Late 1st in a weak draft, to avoid a $2 mil cap hit over the next 2 seasons, when they're likely trying to contend?

 

...Added to the fact that Vegas then can't select a player whom Dallas would prefer to keep, such as Stephen Johns or Brett Ritchie?

 

...Added to the fact that the franchise isn't exactly rolling in cash, and may not want to waste $4 mil on a buyout?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, D-Money said:

Late 1st in a weak draft, to avoid a $2 mil cap hit over the next 2 seasons, when they're likely trying to contend?

 

...Added to the fact that Vegas then can't select a player whom Dallas would prefer to keep, such as Stephen Johns or Brett Ritchie?

 

...Added to the fact that the franchise isn't exactly rolling in cash, and may not want to waste $4 mil on a buyout?

 

People seem intent on ignoring these two points. Speak of the devil @Hutton Wink :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, captainhorvat said:

Even the pick from the eaves deal would be ridiculous, wouldnt it? Why lose a 1st round pick when dallas can just buyout the last year.. 

It's important to realize that, currently, Dallas is not a profitable team and is a recipient of revenue sharing. They don't have the money in the budget to spend for someone who isn't helping the roster. That's been true half of the last decade, Benn and Seguin or not. They have an internal cap... it's not about cap space... They need to make the playoffs to get fans to buy season tickets. 

 

There are a few scenarios in my mind. One, is that they can minus Niemi... for either no retention or on a buyout. That's $1.7 mil they can't use to upgrade a position like D and stay on budget. That also leaves you with Lehtonen as a $5.9 mil back-up which is less than ideal for them. In this case, they not only are $1.7 mil added to cap from Niemi but the around  $4.5+ mil on a backup, so the real budget cost is more than $6.2 mil. 

 

The second scenario is that they can minus Lehtonen and take $2.6 mil for next year on a buyout  (thanks @mll) and overspend on their back up in Niemi by $3.0 mil, leaving them with with a total of $5.6 mil or more misapplied on their budget from goaltending. 

 

So this leaves their preferable scenario, in my mind, which is to completely eliminate both contracts, if possible. At the very least the most expensive one in Lehtonen, leaving them with only the issue of the $3.0 extra on Niemi. The actual savings to them this year is, with including a cheaper backup, 5.9 + 4.5 - 1.2 (?) = $9.2 mil. That's significant to them.

 

To do either they will need to spend from their asset base to mitigate it, there's no way around that, and they'd probably prefer to do both. If they can use picks/prospects/roster players to transfer that financial obligation they will.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, D-Money said:

People also seem intent on thinking Dallas is going to give up #3.

They are (or should be) in win now mode. They have a roughly 3-4 year window where that 3rd OA player is unlikely to contribute much until the very end of that window (if at all).

 

Nobody's saying they should move it for scraps but if they can get a solid top 4, defensive D (one of their biggest weaknesses) and clear one of their unwanted, overpaid goalies....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, theminister said:

It's important to realize that, currently, Dallas is not a profitable team and is a recipient of revenue sharing. They don't have the money in the budget to spend for someone who isn't helping the roster. That's been true half of the last decade, Benn and Seguin or not. They have an internal cap... it's not about cap space... They need to make the playoffs to get fans to buy season tickets. 

 

There are a few scenarios in my mind. One, is that they can minus Niemi... for either no retention or on a buyout. That's $1.7 mil they can't use to upgrade a position like D and stay on budget. That also leaves you with Lehtonen as a $5.9 mil back-up which is less than ideal for them. In this case, they not only are $1.7 mil added to cap from Niemi but the around  $4.5+ mil on a backup, so the real budget cost is more than $6.2 mil. 

 

The second scenario is that they can minus Lehtonen and take $2.6 mil for next year on a buyout  (thanks @mll) and overspend on their back up in Niemi by $3.0 mil, leaving them with with a total of $5.6 mil or more misapplied on their budget from goaltending. 

 

So this leaves their preferable scenario, in my mind, which is to completely eliminate both contracts, if possible. At the very least the most expensive one in Lehtonen, leaving them with only the issue of the $3.0 extra on Niemi. The actual savings to them this year is with inclyding a cheaper backyp 5.9+4.5-1.2 (?) = $9.2 mil. That's significant to them.

 

To do either they will need to spend from their asset base to mitigate it, there's no way around that, and they'd probably prefer to do both. If they can use picks/prospects/roster players to transfer that financial obligation they will.

Exactly.

 

Out of +'s.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, J.R. said:

They are (or should be) in win now mode. They have a roughly 3-4 year window where that 3rd OA player is unlikely to contribute much until the very end of that window (if at all).

 

Nobody's saying they should move it for scraps but if they can get a solid top 4, defensive D (one of their biggest weaknesses) and clear one of their unwanted, overpaid goalies....

If we could get the third overall for Tanev, JB HAS TO DO IT, right?  My God, if that offer was on the table, and JB turned it down.:angry:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, J.R. said:

 

People seem intent on ignoring these two points. Speak of the devil

The question shouldn't be about buyouts it's what is the value of taking on Niemi.

 

If we aren't adding a tanev to the deal, Canuck aren't the only team looking for a vet back up.....That is what will water down the value, even if niemi is a 4 mill cap hit. Considering both goalies only have one year left, If stars are offering their (ana) 1st, other teams (CGY, phi, STL, NYI, NJ, TB, PIT, VAN, BUF) would likely want to jump all over that as well.  

 

Canucks should try to act fast and get something done. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Alflives said:

If we could get the third overall for Tanev, JB HAS TO DO IT, right?  My God, if that offer was on the table, and JB turned it down.:angry:

I would do that deal in a heartbeat...i wonder if dallas would consider it. They will still have a late 1st. Would you make the trade if its tanev and our 2nd rounder for thr 3rd?? I would.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, D-Money said:

Late 1st in a weak draft, to avoid a $2 mil cap hit over the next 2 seasons, when they're likely trying to contend?

 

...Added to the fact that Vegas then can't select a player whom Dallas would prefer to keep, such as Stephen Johns or Brett Ritchie?

 

...Added to the fact that the franchise isn't exactly rolling in cash, and may not want to waste $4 mil on a buyout?

Fair enough you made some good points.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...